Re: Announcing OLPC OS 12.1.0 for XO-1, XO-1.5 and XO-1.75

On Sun, Sep 16, 2012 at 3:45 AM, Bruno Wolff III wrote: > On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 10:12:22 -0600, > Daniel Drake wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> We're pleased to announce the release of OLPC OS 12.1.0 for XO-1, >> XO-1.5 and XO-1.75. Details of new features, known issues, and how to >> download/install/

Re: Orphaning: mtpfs (FUSE filesystem for MTP devices like Android tablets)

On 17 Sep 2012 16:15, "Richard W.M. Jones" wrote: > > > I've orphaned this package. There are various > reasons for this: > > (1) It's buggy: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/bugs/mtpfs > > (2) Upstream is not responsive. The weight of developer effort seems > to have moved to several

Re: Mono stack issues in Fedora 18 (Was Re: F-18 Branched report: 20120920 changes)

On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 7:30 PM, Tom Callaway wrote: > On 09/20/2012 08:05 AM, Fedora Branched Report wrote: >> [clutter-gtk010] >> clutter-gtk010-0.11.4-6.fc17.i686 requires libcogl.so.9 >> clutter-gtk010-0.11.4-6.fc17.x86_64 requires libcogl.so.9()(64bit) >> [ease] >> ease-0.4-

Re: Mono stack issues in Fedora 18 (Was Re: F-18 Branched report: 20120920 changes)

On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 9:30 PM, Tom Callaway wrote: > On 09/20/2012 03:33 PM, Peter Robinson wrote: >> When there's a new release someone >> generally comes in and throws it together and over the fence but >> doesn't actually support it. > > To be fair, th

Re: Mono stack issues in Fedora 18 (Was Re: F-18 Branched report: 20120920 changes)

On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 10:10 PM, Kalev Lember wrote: > On 09/20/2012 08:30 PM, Tom Callaway wrote: >> ease requires clutter-gtk010 (okay, so we drop ease, but...) >> clutter-sharp requires clutter-gtk010 >> >> All of the following packages require clutter-sharp in F18 > > I don't think any of the

Re: Mono stack issues in Fedora 18 (Was Re: F-18 Branched report: 20120920 changes)

On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 5:38 PM, Tom Callaway wrote: > On 09/20/2012 05:10 PM, Kalev Lember wrote: >> On 09/20/2012 08:30 PM, Tom Callaway wrote: >>> ease requires clutter-gtk010 (okay, so we drop ease, but...) >>> clutter-sharp requires clutter-gtk010 >>> >>> All of the following packages require

Re: Fedora ARM weekly status meeting 2012-09-26

Morning all, Sorry for missing last nights meeting. In the short term I don't think I'll be able to make one until at least November as I'll be in Helsinki until at least Nov 2nd and that would make the meeting 11pm for me. I'll move to the format of updating by replying to this mail each week :-

Re: abrt server report: 20121004

On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 3:52 PM, Richard Marko wrote: > Hot problems: > > ID Components Count > > --- > > 11834 GConf2 199 > > 11523 control-center

Re: systemd requires HTTP server and serves QR codes

On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 7:39 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote: > On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 7:59 PM, Matthew Miller > wrote: >> On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 07:37:42PM +0200, Miloslav Trmač wrote: >>> We support a "minimal installation" target >>> (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/MinimalPlatform ), and th

Re: Building an unpatched Linus kernel as an RPM

On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 8:42 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > Reading: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Building_a_custom_kernel > > I know how to rebuild the kernel RPM and have done it many times. > But I've been asked to reproduce a bug using a completely vanilla > unpatched Linus kernel. Do w

Re: Packages in need of new maintainers UPDATED LIST

> On 10/03/2012 02:23 PM, Jon Ciesla wrote: >> >> As a result of FESCO ticket 952*, Lubomir Rintel's 200+ packages are >> in need of new maintainers. Under normal circumstances we'd simply >> orphan them all, but given the large number we want to handle this in >> a more orderly fashion. >> >> Ple

Re: systemd requires HTTP server and serves QR codes

On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 3:54 PM, Seth Vidal wrote: > > > > On Tue, 9 Oct 2012, Matthew Miller wrote: > >> On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 10:18:27AM -0400, Seth Vidal wrote: >>> >>> You'll need to get the packaging team on board with it. I have to >>> say it is pretty much non-existent as a priority to any

Re: systemd requires HTTP server and serves QR codes

On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 4:17 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 04:08:10PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote: >> >> If we can save space in the minimal cloud image, it seems worth doing >> >> to me. Looks like in the current EC2 instance, it's about 35M (

Re: systemd requires HTTP server and serves QR codes

On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 12:58 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote: > On Tue, 09.10.12 21:26, Matthew Miller (mat...@fedoraproject.org) wrote: > >> On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 05:19:59PM -0700, J. Randall Owens wrote: >> > Just on the naming, I'd rather steer clear of the actual concept, let me >> > get this

Re: systemd requires HTTP server and serves QR codes

>> Matthew Miller (mat...@fedoraproject.org) said: >> > On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 02:19:03PM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: >> > > But hey, I don't need to install packages or want python! >> > > systemd+ util-linux + bash + initscripts + passwd: >> > > Install 6 Packages (+108 Dependent packages) >>

Re: minimal install [was Re: systemd requires HTTP server and serves QR codes]

>>> one may say "disk storage is nothing these days" >>> iw ould say: mulitply it with 20, 50, 100 virtual machines >>> on really expensive SAN-storage where "disk space is cheap" >>> is not true >> >> And I would say : get an entreprisey deduping san > > for production under load not really a good

Re: modules, firmware, kernel size (was Re: systemd requires HTTP server and serves QR codes)

On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 6:34 PM, drago01 wrote: > On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 6:58 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 05:59:55PM +0200, drago01 wrote: >>> On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 5:46 PM, Matthew Miller >>> wrote: >>> > On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 05:38:55PM +0200, drago01 wrote: >

Re: libjpeg-turbo API/ABI bump in F19 (transition from jpeg6 to jpeg8 API/ABI)

On 19 Oct 2012 00:51, "Adam Williamson" wrote: > > On Thu, 2012-10-18 at 16:43 +0200, Adam Tkac wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 10:35:56AM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: > > > Adam Tkac (at...@redhat.com) said: > > > > I've just created > > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/libjpeg-tur

Re: Anaconda is totally trashing the F18 schedule (was Re: f18: how to install into a LVM partitions (or RAID))

On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 11:34 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > On 10/31/2012 03:33 PM, drago01 wrote: >> >> >> That's nonsense see the other mail. Would it be more work to maintain >> two branches? Sure. Impossible? *NO*. Even if it delays newui to F20 >> so be it. >> If we don't have the resources to

Re: Anaconda is totally trashing the F18 schedule (was Re: f18: how to install into a LVM partitions (or RAID))

On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 6:37 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On 10/31/2012 11:00 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > >> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 10:59:54AM -0700, Jesse Keating wrote: >> >>> >>> I think we need to give developers more time for feature integration >>> after the feature freeze. >>> >>> +1 >> >

Re: Orphaning Unity bits: bamf, compiz-plugins-main, dee, libindicator

On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 1:18 PM, Tom Callaway wrote: > On 10/31/2012 08:24 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > Only one package depends on any of these: gwibber depends on dee. So > > someone interested in gwibber might want to pick up dee. > > I'll take dee, although, gwibber will never progress past

Re: Orphaning Unity bits: bamf, compiz-plugins-main, dee, libindicator

On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 1:37 PM, Tom Callaway wrote: > On 11/01/2012 09:22 AM, Peter Robinson wrote: > > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 1:18 PM, Tom Callaway > <mailto:tcall...@redhat.com>> wrote: > > > > On 10/31/2012 08:24 PM, Adam W

Re: Anaconda is totally trashing the F18 schedule (was Re: f18: how to install into a LVM partitions (or RAID))

On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 5:12 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Thu, 2012-11-01 at 09:32 -0500, David Lehman wrote: > > On Thu, 2012-11-01 at 13:01 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: > > > On 11/01/2012 12:22 PM, Michael Scherer wrote: > > > > Maybe having some kind of dependencies between feature

Re: Rawhide

On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote: > On Mon, Nov 05, 2012 at 06:12:59 -0500, > Jaroslav Reznik wrote: > >> - Original Message - >> >> This is a problem - when developers do not work first in Rawhide and >> do not push back to branched (or push into branched from Raw

Re: Fedora 18 Beta to slip by two weeks, Beta release date is now Nov 27

On 8 Nov 2012 07:30, "Kevin Kofler" wrote: > > Conan Kudo (ニール・ゴンパ) wrote: > > Oh my goodness. This is the highest amount of slippage I've seen in quite > > some time. What is wrong with Fedora? The slippage is getting worse each > > and every single release. I love Fedora and all, but this is abs

Re: Fedora 18 Beta to slip by two weeks, Beta release date is now Nov 27

On 8 Nov 2012 07:35, "Kevin Kofler" wrote: > > Adam Williamson wrote: > > The new anaconda UI and related features are more or less entirely the > > cause of the slip. > > This shows that those changes should not have been done, or at least not in > this way. Hindsight is a fabulous thing, I susp

Re: Attention, dependency fighters

On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 4:35 AM, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 07:56:30PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: >> long story short, it's firewalld. Its deps are pretty heavy for >> something that's supposed to be in minimal. I'm sure twoerner would >> welcome help in pruning the deps if

Re: [fedora-arm] Fedora ARM weekly status meeting 2012-11-14

On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 6:20 PM, Paul Whalen wrote: > Good day all, > > This weeks Fedora ARM status meeting will take place today (Wednesday Nov > 14th) in #fedora-meeting-1 on Freenode. > Times in various time zones (please let us know if these do not work): > > PDT: 1pm > MDT: 2pm > CDT: 3pm >

Re: bodhi 0.9.3 deployed to production

On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 6:15 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Thu, 2012-11-15 at 05:52 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: >> Luke Macken wrote: >> > A new bugfix release of Bodhi has just been deployed to production. >> > >> > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates >> > >> > Bugs and enhancement reque

Re: Fedora ARM weekly status meeting - 2012-11-28

I'm not going to be able to make the meeting. > This weeks Fedora ARM status meeting will take place today (Wednesday Nov > 28th) in #fedora-meeting-1 on Freenode. > Times in various time zones (please let us know if these do not work): > > PDT: 1pm > MDT: 2pm > CDT: 3pm > EDT: 4pm > UTC: 8pm > B

Re: [fedora-arm] Fedora ARM weekly status meeting minutes 2012-11-28

On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 10:22 PM, Paul Whalen wrote: > Good day all, > > Thanks to those who were able to join us for the weekly status meeting today. > For those that were unable, the minutes are posted below: > > Minutes: > http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2012-11-28/fedora-me

Re: Fedora ARM status meeting 2012-12-05

I can't make the meeting. It conflicts with the Board meeting. > Current items on the agenda: > > 1) Current Problem packages > > 2) F18 ARM VFAD - additional feedback, blockers? > > 3) Ownership of non-release blocking images (Beagleboard XM, etc) Who decided this was a non blocker? It was my un

Re: Fedora ARM status meeting 2012-12-05

On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 12:18 AM, Jon Masters wrote: > On 12/05/2012 02:39 PM, Peter Robinson wrote: >> I can't make the meeting. It conflicts with the Board meeting. >> >>> Current items on the agenda: >>> >>> 1) Current Problem packages >>

Re: F20 System Wide Change: No Default Syslog

On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 10:11 AM, Miroslav Suchý wrote: > On 07/15/2013 10:44 AM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote: >> >> = Proposed System Wide Change: No Default Syslog = >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/NoDefaultSyslog >> >> Change owner(s): Lennart Poettering , Matthew >> Miller >> >> No longer

Re: F20 System Wide Change: No Default Sendmail

On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 2:45 PM, Sérgio Basto wrote: > On Seg, 2013-07-15 at 10:36 +0200, Jaroslav Reznik wrote: >> = Proposed System Wide Change: No Default Sendmail = >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/NoDefaultSendmail >> >> Change owner(s): Lennart Poettering , Matthew >> Miller >> >>

Re: F20 System Wide Change: SSD cache

On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 3:42 PM, Martin Langhoff wrote: > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 7:47 AM, Mihamina Rakotomandimby > wrote: >> One thing I would recommend would be to correctly detect SSD: >> ATM, I installed my Fedora over an SSD and it did not ajust the mount >> settings nor suggest an appropri

Re: F20 System Wide Change: SSD cache

On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 5:21 PM, Martin Langhoff wrote: > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 10:55 AM, Peter Robinson wrote: >> On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 3:42 PM, Martin Langhoff >> wrote: >>> On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 7:47 AM, Mihamina Rakotomandimby >>> wrote: >>>

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 6:08 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote: > Adam Jackson (a...@redhat.com) said: >> If we really wanted to talk about graphics on arm, we'd be talking about >> writing drivers for GPUs. > > Is there any use to shipping freedreno and similar projects in Fedora ARM > before they get to

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 7:21 PM, Brendan Conoboy wrote: > On 07/11/2013 08:46 AM, Till Maas wrote: >> >> On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 07:48:50AM -0400, Jonathan Masters wrote: >>> >>> And following the legitimate concerns about stack-protector this was >>> raised by ARM into core Linaro as an urgent ac

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 7:22 PM, Peter Jones wrote: > On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 10:58:59AM -0700, Brendan Conoboy wrote: > >> Security features are implemented and working- except >> evidently pointer guards, which we found out about *yesterday*. > > The point of this isn't just that it was broken,

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 7:40 PM, Brendan Conoboy wrote: > On 07/11/2013 10:41 AM, Bill Nottingham wrote: >> >> Kernel, glibc, all the core library stacks. And I would argue that yes, >> this >> *includes* libGL. So llvmpipe needs fixed, outside of any desktops. >> Should >> we define the core func

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 8:53 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Thu, 2013-07-11 at 09:17 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: > >> > I'm afraid I can't agree. I like the simplicity of the model you're >> > proposing, but from a practical point of view, there is still a commonly >> > held perception

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 5:32 AM, Matthew Garrett wrote: > On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 11:58:08PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 11:50:24PM -0400, Rahul Sundaram wrote: >> > > Or does it mean x86 as PA is out of line? There are a lot more people >> > > with ARM devices than x8

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 9:08 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Thu, 2013-07-11 at 22:07 -0400, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote: >> Adam Williamson writes: >> >> > [...] "Primary Architectures : These are architectures with the >> > majority of the users, the most common architectures. [...] >> >> By that s

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 1:08 PM, David Tardon wrote: > On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 06:06:04PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: >> On 07/11/2013 02:04 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote: >> >On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 3:56 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" >> > wrote: >> >>Each sub-community ( be it spins be it vari

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 3:37 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 02:17:28PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: >> 1. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=949328 >> 2. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=869540 > > Often, people maintain a package because it's requ

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

That's the point. You don't get to be a primary architecture until you've demonstrated that doing so won't slow down the other architectures >>> Is that "you don't get to be a primary architecture unless you have >>> demonstrated that nobody outside of the ARM SIG needs to do any wor

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 9:49 AM, Bastien Nocera wrote: > If phones and tablets aren't the primary focus, what is? Development boards, > for the sake of running Fedora ARM on something? Server systems that don't > exist yet (or aren't widely available[1])? They're not the primary focus of mainli

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

>> They're not the primary focus of mainline Fedora either. We're >> CURRENTLY focusing on development boards (100s of examples), desktop >> like systems (Trimslice and other similar systems), netbooks/laptop >> style systems and the various media centre style devices (STB/media >> sticks etc), and

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

>> Any image that wants to use a kernel that is a non upstream mainline >> Fedora kernel ships as a remix. > > This is the rootfs for F18 (I started work on that before F19 got out): We no longer support a rootfs tarball because it caused more problems than it solved. >> I'm happy to create a rem

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 10:55 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Mon, 2013-07-15 at 22:42 +0100, Peter Robinson wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 8:53 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: >> > On Thu, 2013-07-11 at 09:17 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: >> > >>

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 12:09 AM, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 04:07:39PM -0700, Brendan Conoboy wrote: >> >I don't want to move the goalposts on the ARM effort, but I think it's >> >reasonable to expect that a list of "Known Broken/Deficient items" be >> >available. Does such a

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 3:53 AM, Matthew Garrett wrote: > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 07:33:48PM -0700, Brendan Conoboy wrote: >> On 07/16/2013 07:16 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: > >> >For instance, it seems to be missing both the stack protector and >> >llvmpipe issues. >> >> Finishing scope of stack p

Re: F20 System Wide Change: ARM as primary Architecture

On 17 Jul 2013 18:18, "Brendan Conoboy" wrote: > > On 07/17/2013 09:53 AM, Bastien Nocera wrote: >> >> As I mentioned earlier in the thread, I'd rather have community accessible machines. >> And I'm not really comfortable manipulating build images from 4000 miles away if >> I haven't been able to

Re: F20 Self Contained Change: Remove deprecated calls of using ntpdate in favor of ntpd

>> > Once upon a time, Jaroslav Reznik said: >> >> ntpdate is slowly being depricated. STIG enhancements for RHEL 6 penalize >> >> systems that make use of ntpdate. Also documentation from the NSA >> >> Hardening >> >> Guidelines as well as CIS Hardening documentation recommends disabling the >> >

Re: Why does so much virt stuff depend on glusterfs?

On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 11:14 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 08:26:18PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: >> On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 05:17:01PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: >> > Today in Absurd Dependency Bingo: >> > > glusterfs x86_64 3.4.0-2.fc19

Re: Why does so much virt stuff depend on glusterfs?

On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 11:19 AM, Kaleb KEITHLEY wrote: > On 07/23/2013 03:44 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >> >> >> Not sure if glusterfs could be split into client and server parts >> and/or if that would help (only a "client" bit is needed). > > > glusterfs already exists in client (glusterfs a

Re: Why does so much virt stuff depend on glusterfs?

On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 12:57 PM, Kaleb KEITHLEY wrote: > On 07/23/2013 05:20 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >> >> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 12:45:59PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: >>> >>> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 03:49:37PM +0530, Kaleb KEITHLEY wrote: On 07/23/2013 03:44 PM, Richard W.

Re: BlueZ Status in Fedora.

On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 6:14 PM, Tomasz Torcz wrote: > On Thu, Aug 01, 2013 at 07:05:39PM +0200, Stefan Held wrote: >> What exactly is holding the Updates back in Fedora? >> Is there a reason for excluding the 5.x Series? > > > See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Bluez5 > and the thread st

Re: rawhide report: 20130804 changes

On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 8:51 PM, Paul Howarth wrote: > On Sun, 04 Aug 2013 16:28:00 +0100 > Sérgio Basto wrote: > >> On Dom, 2013-08-04 at 13:03 +, Fedora Rawhide Report wrote: >> > Compose started at Sun Aug 4 08:15:02 UTC 2013 >> >> DEBUG util.py:264: Error: Package: po4a-0.44-10.fc20.noar

Re: mass rebuild update

On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 7:44 AM, Marcela Mašláňová wrote: > On 08/05/2013 04:35 AM, Dennis Gilmore wrote: >> >> There is a large number of failures[1] that need to be >> addressed. >> >> Dennis > > > Do you have also numbers how many FTBFS we had in F19 and F20? It might be > good for post mortem

Re: mass rebuild update

> On Sun, 2013-08-04 at 21:35 -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote: >> There is a large number of failures[1] that need to be >> addressed. > > I don't know if this is just a coincidence, but the links to log files > in the filled FTBFS bug reports don't work. > > Here are two examples (from my FTBFS bugs):

Orphaning syncevolution

Hi All, I plan to orphan syncevolution because I no longer use it. It's in pretty reasonable shape. Let me know if your interested in taking over maintainership before I do. Peter -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Co

Re: gdcm FTBFS: texlive broken in rawhide?

>> >> Package owner Jindrich Novy is no longer in Red Hat so I am not sure how >> >> quickly it may get fixed. >> > >> > >> > I really hope the next mantainer can manage a 14 mb spec file :) >> >> In Mandriva I did a work very similar to current Fedora texlive, but I did >> create almost 3k packa

Re: fpc (free pascal compiler) is now available on F20 armv7hl

Hans, You are AWESOME That is all, thank you! Pete On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 9:34 PM, Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi All, > > I spend mot of my time today bootstrapping fpc on ARM for F20. This is done > now, > and the result seems to work :) So if you've any packages which are FTBFS > on > F-20 d

Re: Orphaned: libgnomecups

On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 6:39 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote: > Underlying dep of libgnomeprint22/libgnomeprintui22, which is used by a few > end-user things (gpp, conglomerate, gnome-genius), but nothing I need for > now, so giving up ownership. Isn't it just time we killed the old gnome printing infr

Re: [ACTION REQUIRED] Retiring packages for Fedora 20 v2

On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 9:26 PM, Kalev Lember wrote: > On 08/16/2013 10:15 PM, Till Maas wrote: >> On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 03:17:42PM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: >> >>> FTBFS packages need: >>> >>> 1) a list gathered by pruning the old F18FTBFS bug, or noting what things >>> still have earlier d

Re: [ACTION REQUIRED] Retiring packages for Fedora 20 v2

On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 10:20 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote: > Bill Nottingham (nott...@redhat.com) said: >> > libvpd-2.1.1-2.fc15 f20 ausil >> > lsvpd-1.6.8-3.fc15f20 ausil > > ... and note that these two are PPC only,

Re: [ACTION REQUIRED] Retiring packages for Fedora 20 v2

On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 10:20 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote: > Peter Robinson (pbrobin...@gmail.com) said: >> On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 9:26 PM, Kalev Lember wrote: >> > On 08/16/2013 10:15 PM, Till Maas wrote: >> >> On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 03:17:42PM -0400, Bill Nottin

Re: Why is AHCI built-in?

On 19 Aug 2013 19:40, "Ian Pilcher" wrote: > > On 08/19/2013 01:19 PM, Kyle McMartin wrote: > > because it's commonly used and found on basically every machine now. > > there are many advantages to having it built in that outweigh the cons. > > A couple of questions: > > - What are the advantages

Re: Heads-up: Obsolete but still included packages

On 19 Aug 2013 19:51, "Till Maas" wrote: > > Hi, > > On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 10:44:02AM +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > A couple of obsolete packages is still included in Rawhide. Usually > > that means a package has not been retired yet or has been retired > > incompletely: > > > > https://f

Re: Heads-up: Obsolete but still included packages

> yum-utils > I don't think yum-utils should be on that list given that it appears to be actively maintained and not obsoleted. Peter > zeitgeist-datahub > > [...] > > chktex-1.6.4-12.fc19.src.rpm > classads-1.0.8-7.fc20.src.rpm > detex-2.8-6.fc20.src.rpm > drupal6-drush-4.1-7.fc20.src.rpm > f

Re: [ACTION REQUIRED] Retiring packages for Fedora 20 v2

On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 9:16 PM, Till Maas wrote: > The following packages have been retired: > > alsa-oss > firmware-extract > firstboot > gkrellm-timestamp > guiloader > justmoon > lybniz > mars-sim > miau > openstack-tempo > osgal > python3-cherrypy > vblade > > Because alsa-oss was retired, m

Re: [ACTION REQUIRED] Retiring long-term FTBFS packages for Fedora 20

On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 10:41 PM, Till Maas wrote: > On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 11:21:38PM +0200, Dan Horák wrote: > > On Mon, 19 Aug 2013 23:05:32 +0200 > > Till Maas wrote: > > > > > The following packages did not build for two releases and will be > > > retired around 2013-08-26 unless someone r

Re: [ACTION REQUIRED] Retiring long-term FTBFS packages for Fedora 20

On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 4:16 PM, Gustavo Luiz Duarte wrote: > On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 6:05 PM, Till Maas wrote: > > petitboot dwmw2, tbreeds, jwboyer >> > > > Please don't retire petitboot. I will fix it. I might also apply for > co-maintainer. > Why? It's for the PS3 which no lo

Re: What to do with a noarch package that fails to build on ARM

On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 8:20 PM, Andrew McNabb wrote: > I maintain the python-pexpect package, which is noarch. Koji is trying > to build the Fedora 20 packages on ARM machines, and for some reason, > one of the tests is failing. I've opened a report with upstream, but > neither the upstream ma

Re: What to do with a noarch package that fails to build on ARM

On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 10:14 PM, Andrew McNabb wrote: > On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 03:28:13PM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > On 08/20/2013 03:20 PM, Andrew McNabb wrote: > > > What's the right way to deal with this situation? Is it possible > > > to block the noarch package from the ARM archi

Re: What to do with a noarch package that fails to build on ARM

On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 10:21 PM, Andrew McNabb wrote: > On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 10:18:24PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote: > > > > As it's noarch it can be built on any arch. > > Even with ExcludeArch? That's disappointing. :( > > I assume I have to get rid

Re: slowing down the development schedule for a release.

On 21 Aug 2013 08:13, "Dennis Gilmore" wrote: > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Tue, 20 Aug 2013 23:37:44 -0400 > Matthew Miller wrote: > > > On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 09:09:03PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: > > > > Without spinning the wheel of blame -- at Flock, we talked abo

Re: Wider feedback requested on two changes to our base/core defaults

On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 7:45 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: > Greetings all > > After sitting Dan's Walsh Secure Linux Containers talk at flock where he > mentioned him and Dan B. had successfully scaled application containers to > what 8000 instances or so and I noticing that his slide where

Re: F21 schedule: what would you do with more time?

On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 4:12 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:08:18PM +0800, Christopher Meng wrote: > > > What things we do _now_ could be > > > improved with the investment of some effort? > > Perl rebuild always take a lot of time, and as a result it will affect > > the ma

Re: F21 schedule: what would you do with more time?

On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 4:56 PM, Mat Booth wrote: > On 22 August 2013 16:03, Matthew Miller wrote: > >> Based on discussion at Flock, on the devel mailing list, and in the FESCo >> meeting, we are looking for feedback on the idea of a longer release cycle >> for Fedora 21 -- not (right now at le

Re: F21 schedule: what would you do with more time?

> > E.g. going after these: > http://ausil.fedorapeople.org/**f20-failed.html > > Right now we have ~350+ broken packages, a lengthy series of broken deps, > an unknown amount of defacto unmaintained packages and an unknown amout of > maintainers havi

Re: F-20 Branched report: 20130826 changes

> python-pylons-1.0.1-1.fc20 > -- > * Mon Aug 26 2013 Christopher Meng - 1.0.1-1 > - SPEC cleanup. > - New version.(BZ#767572, BZ#982873) > - Drop the patch. > - Fix FTBFS by disable tests.(#BZ993159, #BZ914412) > This isn't really the right way to fix a FTBFS, the tests a

Re: Graphics driver support in F21+

> xorg-x11-drv-geode > geode is used on the OLPC XO-1 and is maintained by Daniel Drake (dsd) and he's basically done all recent commits for upstream releases and fixes unless it's been something like an ABI rebuild or similar. I'm sure he'll take over the maintainership if needed. Peter -- deve

Re: [ACTION REQUIRED] Packages depending on retired packages

> python-quantumclient orphan, jruzicka, vaneldik, pbrady, apevec, gkotton, >markmc, rkukura > Depending on: python-quantumclient > openstack-quantum (maintained by: rkukura, itamarjp, otherwiseguy, > mmagr, josecastroleon, vaneldik, pbrady, rackerjoe, apevec, chri

Re: Builder update

On 29 Aug 2013 18:12, "Kevin Fenzi" wrote: > > On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 09:05:24 +0300 > Panu Matilainen wrote: > > ...snip... > > > Let me say AWESOME one more time :) > > :) > > I actually didn't know that this was so much of a bottleneck for you > folks. ;( > > Anyhow, glad we can move forward and

Re: Builder update

> > > I'm not saying this was a bad idea, but the Koji developers now have to > test on both RHEL 6 and Fedora now. Let this message serve as a warning > to them if they did not already know. ;) They already were anyway due to the ARM builders in secondary so they've been getting reports from us

Re: [ACTION REQUIRED] Packages depending on retired packages

On Sat, Aug 31, 2013 at 8:36 PM, Till Maas wrote: > On Sat, Aug 31, 2013 at 06:06:16PM +0200, Nicolas Chauvet wrote: > > 2013/8/29 Till Maas > > > > > On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 10:53:53PM +0200, Till Maas wrote: > > > > > > > Package(co)maintainers > > > > > > > >

Re: COPR

On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 3:10 PM, Jay Greguske wrote: > On 09/02/2013 04:29 AM, Miroslav Suchý wrote: > > On 08/30/2013 10:01 PM, Jay Greguske wrote: > >> I'd like to see some elaboration on why VMs instead of chroots would be > >> required. I can draw my own conclusions (security) but I'd like to

Re: COPR

On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 8:43 PM, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 03:33:10PM -0400, Jay Greguske wrote: > > > koji already uses VMs for x86. > > Not for RPM builds. > > I think we're talking about different things here. It happens that some of > the x86 builders are VMs, but they're

Re: Firefox and Gstreamer

On 4 Oct 2013 23:45, "Michael Cronenworth" wrote: > > Why is gstreamer explicitly disabled for Firefox 24+? > > (before I make an RFE bug) There already is a RFE bug with all the details why its not enabled. > Thanks, > Michael > -- > devel mailing list > devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > https://

Building and submitting updates for Fedora 20

I shouldn't have to remind packagers that post Alpha branching packages that are updates for rawhide (unless of course you're doing early rawhide dev for the next release) and/or earlier releases also need to both build and submit updates for Fedora 20. I've just done a "yum --releasever=20 distro

Re: Graphics driver support in F21+

On 3 Oct 2013 16:48, "Bruno Wolff III" wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 03, 2013 at 12:35:31 +0100, > Adam Williamson wrote: >> >> >> that you can do successfully complete a graphical DVD default package >> install with 512MB of RAM, or a text network default package install. I >> believe a text install

Re: libtool broken in Koji F19 buildroot?

On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 7:54 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 07:38:59PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >> >> While preparing the buildroot, Koji is saying: >> >> DEBUG util.py:266: Error: Package: libtool-2.4.2-16.fc19.x86_64 (build) >> DEBUG util.py:266: Requires

Re: aarch64 bugs

On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 2:53 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote: > On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 09:14:52 -0500, > Jeffrey Ollie wrote: >> >> Yesterday a bunch of bugs were opened up regarding aarch64 support in >> some packages. I'd like to do my part in fixing these, but is there a >> way to actually run t

Re: aarch64 bugs

On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 7:32 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 03:12:13PM +0000, Peter Robinson wrote: >> On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 2:53 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote: >> > On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 09:14:52 -0500, >> > Jeffrey Ollie wrote: >> &

Re: aarch64 bugs

On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 8:46 AM, Roberto Ragusa wrote: > On 03/23/2013 04:12 PM, Peter Robinson wrote: >> On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 2:53 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote: > >> Eventually there will be hardware available but I'm not sure when >> that will be as there's no

Re: config.guess/config.sub for aarch64 (was Re: Mass Rebuild for Fedora 19)

On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 8:36 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote: > On 02/08/2013 09:30 AM, Brendan Conoboy wrote: >> >> On 02/08/2013 07:12 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> >>> Dennis Gilmore writes: Additionally we will be mass patching config.guess and config.sub to support aarch64 in preperation

Re: [fedora-arm] Fedora ARM weekly status meeting 2013-03-27

I won't be in attendance as I have a personal event. > 0) Status of ACTION items from our previous meeting > > 1) Problem packages Currently just tog-pegasus and some of the ruby packages. I spent some time Sun/Mon/Tues and went through the outstanding builds and pushed new builds for ones that

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >